Oppo Politics: fumbling foreign policy

"mkbruin, Atlas VP" (mkbruin) 05/08/2018 at 10:30 • Filed to: None

1

10

Let’s talk interference.

I would love to hear the more liberal take on the “shadow diplomacy” action being activily undertaken by John Kerry. I can’t recall any time in history where an outgoing administration actively engaged in unauthorized foreign policy so brazenly.

I’m not going to scream Logan Act!!!! although it will be curious to see if the same Democrats that screamed that about Flynn come to the defense of Kerry. A report came out last night Friday that Kerry is actively lobbying foreign governments and congressman counter to the administration as it relates to the Iran deal, and word hit the wires within the last day that he’s also actively interfering with Palestinian affairs also.

A few examples:

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

WASHINGTON — John Kerry’s bid to save one of his most significant accomplishments as secretary of state took him to New York on a Sunday afternoon two weeks ago, where, more than a year after he left office, he engaged in some unusual shadow diplomacy with a top-ranking Iranian official.

He sat down at the United Nations with Foreign Minister Javad Zarif to discuss ways of preserving the pact limiting Iran’s nuclear weapons program. It was the second time in about two months that the two had met to strategize over salvaging a deal they spent years negotiating during the Obama administration, according to a person briefed on the meetings.

With the Iran deal facing its gravest threat since it was signed in 2015, Kerry has been on an aggressive yet stealthy mission to preserve it, using his deep lists of contacts gleaned during his time as the top US diplomat to try to apply pressure on the Trump administration from the outside. President Trump, who has consistently criticized the pact and campaigned in 2016 on scuttling it, faces a May 12 deadline to decide whether to continue abiding by its terms.

Kerry also met last month with German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, and he’s been on the phone with top European Union official Federica Mogherini, according to the source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to reveal the private meetings. Kerry has also met with French President Emmanuel Macron in both Paris and New York, conversing over the details of sanctions and regional nuclear threats in both French and English.

The rare moves by a former secretary of state highlight the stakes for Kerry personally, as well as for other Obama-era diplomats who are dismayed by what they see as Trump’s disruptive approach to diplomacy, and who view the Iran nuclear deal as a factor for stability in the Middle East and for global nuclear nonproliferation. The pact, which came after a marathon negotiating session in Vienna that involved Iran and six world powers, lifted sanctions in return for Iran stopping its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

“It is unusual for a former secretary of state to engage in foreign policy like this, as an actual diplomat and quasi-negotiator,” said Michael O’Hanlon, a foreign policy expert at the Brookings Institution. “Of course, former secretaries of state often remain quite engaged with foreign leaders, as they should, but it’s rarely so issue-specific, especially when they have just left office.”

Kerry declined to be interviewed for this story. The quiet lobbying campaign — by him and others — is being conducted below the radar because he and his allies believe a high-profile defense of the deal by prominent Democrats would only backfire and provoke Trump, making it more likely the president would pull the United States out of the deal.

“Part of the equation is if Ernie [Ernest Moniz, the former US energy ecretary] or John made a bold statement, [Trump] is . . . crazy, and he might do the opposite just to spite them,” said one source who has worked with Kerry. “You’re liable to spur this guy in a direction you don’t want him to go in, just to be spiteful.”

Moniz was a key part of the negotiating team, meeting with his Iranian counterpart as they determined some of the technical scientific details.

A former Obama White House official said there is little to be gained by aiming the effort directly at Trump.

“At least from our network, you’re not going to find messages aimed at him directly,” said the official. “It would be counterproductive. Anything with our brand attached to it, he’ll run in the opposite direction.”

Democratic lawmakers in Congress also have been relatively quiet, and not all share Kerry’s belief that the deal is essential for preventing a nuclear arms race in the volatile region. Kerry has quietly tried to bolster support in Congress. In recent weeks he’s placed dozens of phone calls and, often with Moniz by his side, has lobbied members of Congress, including House Speaker Paul Ryan. While he is not negotiating as he did as secretary of state, he is attempting through quiet advocacy to preserve what he accomplished.

Kerry supporters see in this campaign some of his trademark traits, especially his unflagging energy even in the face of potential failure. Critics see something else, a former office holder working with foreign officials to potentially undermine the policy aims of a current administration.

Kerry is coordinating his push with a group of officials who were his top advisers at the State Department, and who helped craft and negotiate the Iran deal in the first place. The group, called Diplomacy Works, has an advisory council that includes lead Iran-deal negotiator Wendy Sherman, former State Department chief of staff Jon Finer, and former spokeswoman Jen Psaki.

The group claims to be responsible for 100 news articles, 34 television and radio hits, and 37 opinion pieces on the Iran question. They do fact checks of criticisms of the agreement and blast them out to an e-mail list of nearly 4,000 policy makers and foreign policy experts.

But the group determined that the most influential voices would not be Democrats, and instead would focus on Europeans, Israelis, and nonpartisan experts to try and salvage the deal, according to a person involved in the effort. As a sign of the their success, Kerry has pointed to an April 25 letter signed by 26 former top-ranking Israeli military and security officials urging the United States to stay in the agreement.

“Our effort is self-aware,” said David Wade, a longtime Kerry adviser who was chief of staff at the State Department and is helping advise Diplomacy Works. “We are in uncharted waters. The bipartisan, traditional foreign policy community remains on the president’s enemies list from 2016. The president delights in dismissing anything accomplished under his predecessor, so we know traditional validators wouldn’t be compelling to him.”

“This isn’t President Obama’s agreement. It’s the world’s agreement,” he added. “Maybe Macron, Merkel, and Great Britain can persuade the administration, but if they can’t they’ll be even more essential to protecting the deal absent the United States. We know these voices are powerful. They have an audience with the president and our allies are popular at home.”

They are not ignoring the domestic audience.

Kerry and Moniz met in February with Ryan, who has been outspoken in his opposition to the Iran deal. Kerry also held a breakfast briefing last week with members of the House and Senate, which was designed to answer questions as well as underscore how, if Trump pulls out, Europe could hold the deal together.

Kerry’s activities could raise questions if they are perceived as a direct effort to counter current administration foreign policy.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Former secretary of state told a close confidant of Mahmoud Abbas that he’s considering another run for the White House

Urged Palestinians to ‘play for time’ while Trump is president and said he could broker a separate peace deal with Israel

Lebanese academic who met with Kerry in London relayed the conversation back to the Palestinian Authority, and an Israeli newspaper reported it

His comments, reported by the Israeli newspaper !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , came during a !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! discussion about the Middle East peace process with Hussein Agha, a Lebanese academic who is close to Abbas.

Kerry, 74, said his advanced age wouldn’t be an impediment to mounting another White House bid, and urged Agha to tell Abbas to ‘stay strong’ and ‘play for time’ while Trump is in the White House. 

The paper reported that Kerry ‘used derogatory terms and even worse’ to describe President Donald Trump, and said Abbas should focus on personally attacking the U.S. president rather than weighing in on his foreign policy decisions.

Kerry told an audience at the World Economic Forum last year that the Trump administration would last only ‘a year’ or ‘two years’ if he were to pull out of an Obama-brokered nuclear deal with Iran. 

He told Agha that he could broker an Israeli-Palestinian peace process that’s separate from the on-again, off-again roadmap the Trump administration is pursuing.

fintail > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 10:35

1

Sometimes you gotta step out of line to help right a sinking ship.

45's apparent line on Iran is yet another gift to his friend Stalputin.

Maybe Jared can save it all LOL.

Smallbear wants a modern Syclone, local Maple Leafs spammer > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 10:45

0

What’s not to understand?

Rule 69 – Interference on the Goalkeeper
69.1 Interference on the Goalkeeper - This rule is based on the premise
that an attacking player’s position, whether inside or outside the
crease, should not, by itself, determine whether a goal should be allowed or disallowed. In other words, goals scored while attacking
players are standing in the crease may, in appropriate circumstances
be allowed. Goals should be disallowed only if: (1) an attacking
player, either by his positioning or by contact, impairs the goalkeeper’s
ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal; or (2) an
attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a
goalkeeper, inside or outside of his goal crease. Incidental contact
with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when
such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, provided the
attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
The rule will be enforced exclusively in accordance with the on-ice
judgement of the Referee(s), but may be subject to a Coach’s
Challenge (see Rule 78.7).
For purposes of this rule, “contact,” whether incidental or
otherwise, shall mean any contact that is made between or among a
goalkeeper and attacking player(s), whether by means of a stick or
any part of the body.
The overriding rationale of this rule is that a goalkeeper should
have the ability to move freely within his goal crease without being
hindered by the actions of an attacking player. If an attacking player
enters the goal crease and, by his actions, impairs the goalkeeper’s
ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be
disallowed.
If an attacking player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by a
defending player so as to cause him to come into contact with the
goalkeeper, such contact will not be deemed contact initiated by the
attacking player for purposes of this rule, provided the attacking player
has made a reasonable effort to avoid such contact.
If a defending player has been pushed, shoved, or fouled by an
attacking player so as to cause the defending player to come into
contact with his own goalkeeper, such contact shall be deemed
contact initiated by the attacking player for purposes of this rule, and if
necessary a penalty assessed to the attacking player and if a goal is
scored it would be disallowed.
69.2 Penalty - In all cases in which an attacking player initiates intentional or deliberate contact with a goalkeeper, whether or not the goalkeeper is inside or outside the goal crease, and whether or not a goal is scored, the attacking player will receive a penalty (minor or major, as the Referee deems appropriate). In all cases where the infraction being imposed is to the attacking player for hindering the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely in his goal crease, the penalty to be assessed is for goalkeeper interference.
In exercising his judgment, the Referee should give more
significant consideration to the degree and nature of the contact with
the goalkeeper than to the exact location of the goalkeeper at the time
of the contact.
69.3 Contact Inside the Goal Crease - If an attacking player initiates
contact with a goalkeeper, incidental or otherwise, while the
goalkeeper is in his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal will be
disallowed.

If a goalkeeper, in the act of establishing his position within his
goal crease, initiates contact with an attacking player who is in the
goal crease, and this results in an impairment of the goalkeeper’s
ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be
disallowed.
If, after any contact by a goalkeeper who is attempting to establish
position in his goal crease, the attacking player does not immediately
vacate his current position in the goal crease (i.e. give ground to the
goalkeeper), and a goal is scored, the goal will be disallowed. In all
such cases, whether or not a goal is scored, the attacking player will
receive a minor penalty for goalkeeper interference.
If an attacking player establishes a significant position within the
goal crease, so as to obstruct the goalkeeper’s vision and impair his
ability to defend his goal, and a goal is scored, the goal will be
disallowed.
For this purpose, a player “establishes a significant position within
the crease” when, in the Referee’s judgment, his body, or a
substantial portion thereof, is within the goal crease for more than an
instantaneous period of time.
Refer also to Reference Tables – Table 16 – Interference on the
Goalkeeper Situations (page 151).
69.4 Contact Outside the Goal Crease - If an attacking player initiates
any contact with a goalkeeper, other than incidental contact, while the
goalkeeper is outside his goal crease, and a goal is scored, the goal
will be disallowed.
A goalkeeper is not “fair game” just because he is outside the goal
crease. The appropriate penalty should be assessed in every case
where an attacking player makes unnecessary contact with the
goalkeeper. However, incidental contact will be permitted when the
goalkeeper is in the act of playing the puck outside his goal crease
provided the attacking player has made a reasonable effort to avoid
such unnecessary contact.
When a goalkeeper has played the puck outside of his crease and
is then prevented from returning to his crease area due to the
deliberate actions of an attacking player, such player may be
penalized for goalkeeper interference. Similarly, the goalkeeper may
be penalized, if by his actions outside of his crease he deliberately
interferes with an attacking player who is attempting to play the puck
or an opponent.
Refer also to Reference Tables – Table 16 – Interference on the
Goalkeeper Situations (page 151).
69.5 Coach’s Challenge – Refer to Rule 78.7.
69.6 Face-off Location – Whenever the Referee stops play to disallow a
goal as a result of contact with the goalkeeper (incidental or
otherwise), the resulting face-off shall take place at the nearest neutral
zone face-off spot outside the attacking zone of the offending team.
69.7 Rebounds and Loose Pucks - In a rebound situation, or where a
goalkeeper and attacking player(s) are simultaneously attempting to
play a loose puck, whether inside or outside the crease, incidental contact with the goalkeeper will be permitted, and any goal that is
scored as a result thereof will be allowed.
In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net
together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop, the
goal will be disallowed. If applicable, appropriate penalties will be
assessed. If, however, in the opinion of the Referee, the attacking
player was pushed or otherwise fouled by a defending player causing
the goalkeeper to be pushed into the net together with the puck, the
goal can be permitted.
In the event that the puck is under a player in or around the crease
area (deliberately or otherwise), a goal cannot be scored by pushing
this player together with the puck into the goal. If applicable, the
appropriate penalties will be assessed, including a penalty shot if
deemed to be covered in the crease deliberately (see Rule 63 –
Delaying the Game).
69.8 Fines and Suspensions - An attacking player who, in the judgment
of the Referee, initiates contact with the goalkeeper, whether inside or
outside the crease, in a fashion that would otherwise warrant a
penalty, will be assessed an appropriate penalty (minor or major
and/or game misconduct) and will be subject to additional sanctions
as appropriate pursuant to Rule 28 – Supplementary Discipline.

PatBateman > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 10:48

1

Time to yank some passports!!

Not really, but I could see it happening.

Tekamul > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 11:04

1

Kerry is totally overstepping, and needs to let people within the system try to manage communications. Also, he’s delusional if he thinks he’s up for a 2020 run.

But also, this policy of steering the country into a rock wall to keep campaign promises is going to be a painful lesson in politics for a lot of voters that typically remain uninterested in most foreign policy events.

LimitedTimeOnly @ opposite-lock.com > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 11:11

1

I was going to say that it is a problem only if he is negotiating, and the reports seem to indicate that he is, if he is referring to future promises under his future presidency. On the other hand, Kerry, or me, should be able to lobby or seek to influence foreign governments (under all applicable laws).

Then I found the text of the Logan Act ( thanks, Wikipedia ):

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

That surprises me a bit, as I would draw the line at offering something tangible in return for a policy change, while permitting an attempt to influence through discussion. Seems like Kerry may have crossed my line, as well as the Logan Act.

someassemblyrequired > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 11:32

1

The Logan Act is really irrelevant, there have been no convictions ever under the act and it remains constitutionally untested. Remember Mike Flynn pled guilty to lying to the FBI, not a Logan Act violation.

Foreign governments are just waiting for the wheels of justice to turn. They’ll exploit Trump when they see an opportunity (just patronize him and he’ll give you everything you ever wanted, see also Boeing/Carrier/Ford). He’s a useful idiot to them, but they don’t see his foreign policy outlasting his administration (or even the week for that matter). Which is probably why they are talking to (and listening to) Kerry (and probably other Republicans and Democrats).

gettingoldercarguy > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 11:34

0

Don’t ever stop doing these, there’s a group of us who just laugh our ass off at them and need this humor.

For Sweden > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 11:37

1

I’ll support anyone who delivers me a pallet of cash

Chariotoflove > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 14:14

2

In general, I think private citizens should best try to influence foreign policy through internal efforts. To the rest of the world, our country should present a unified face, and that face is the current elected government.

Spanfeller is a twat > mkbruin, Atlas VP 05/08/2018 at 15:07

0

Isn’t Kelly a former government employee?